Loop electrocautery excisional procedure: Therapeutic effectiveness as an ablation and a conization equivalent

Michael Gold, Charles J. Dunton, Jenna Murray, George Macones, Cheryl Hanau, John A. Carlson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

37 Scopus citations


This study was designed to compare the effectiveness of loop excision procedures as ablation and conization equivalents, and their use in recurrent cervical high-grade dysplasia patients. We retrospectively reviewed patients undergoing loop procedures between January 1992 and April 1994. Conization equivalents were defined as procedures performed for unsatisfactory colposcopy, positive endocervical curettage, discordant cytology and histology, and cytology suggestive of invasion. Effectiveness in high-grade recurrent lesions was evaluated separately. Therapeutic failure was defined as any recurrence of high-grade dysplasia. One hundred sixty-two patients underwent loop procedures, of which 123 (75.9%) had follow-up examinations and are included. Mean follow-up was 17.9 months. Seventy-six patients (61.8%) had the loop procedure performed as an ablation equivalent, 29 (23.6%) as a conization equivalent, and 18 (14.6%) for recurrent disease. Overall effectiveness was 82.1% and for ablation and conization equivalent procedures was 82.9 and 82.8%, respectively. There was no significant difference between effectiveness when performed for initial therapy (82.9%) and for recurrent disease (72.2%) (P = 0.46). In conclusion, loop excision procedures are effective as ablation and conization equivalents and as treatment for recurrent high-grade dysplasia.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)241-244
Number of pages4
JournalGynecologic oncology
Issue number2
StatePublished - May 1996


Dive into the research topics of 'Loop electrocautery excisional procedure: Therapeutic effectiveness as an ablation and a conization equivalent'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this